Whitley v. Baptist Health et al

Filing 41

ORDER: The Court has received the Judgments and Mandates from the Court of Appeals, 32 , 33 , 34 , & 40 . The Court stands by an reinstates part of its vacated 24 Order. On reconsideration, the Court concludes that it decided the ERISA issues, the basic CAFA jurisdictional requirements, and the local controversy exception correctly. But the Court swung and missed on the citizenship/residence issue. Whitley's motion to remand and all related papers, 11 , 12 , 15 , 16 , 20 , and 23 , are reinstated. And the motion is denied: this Court has subject matter jurisdiction, and Whitley's case will stay here. An Initial Scheduling Order will issue. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/13/2017. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
BRIAN WHITLEY, Individually and
on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated

v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 4:16-cv-624-DPM

BAPTIST HEALTH; BAPTIST HEALTH
HOSPITALS; DIAMOND RISK INSURANCE
LLC; CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY;
ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY;
ADMIRAL INDEMNITY COMPANY;
IRONSHORE INDEMNITY INC.; and
IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
The Court has received the Judgments and Mandates from the Court of
Appeals. Ng 32, 33, 34 & 40. This Court's Order on subject matter jurisdiction
was vacated and the case sent back for reconsideration in light of Hargett v.
RevClaims, LLC, 854 F.3d 962 (8th Cir. 2017). Done. The Court stands by and

reinstates part of its vacated Order, Ng 24. On reconsideration, the Court
concludes that it decided the BRISA issues, the basic CAFA jurisdictional
requirements, and the local controversy exception correctly. But the Court
swung and missed on the citizenship/ residence issue. Hargett reminds that
residence doesn't determine domicile, which is the core of citizenship for

jurisdictional purposes.

Whitley's complaint speaks only of Arkansas

residents. This is insufficient under the CAFA home state exception. 28
U.S.C. § 1332(d)(4)(B). That exception, therefore, doesn't apply. Whitley's
motion to remand and all related papers, NQ 11-12, 15-16, 20 & 23, are
reinstated.

And the motion is denied:

this Court has subject matter

jurisdiction, and Whitley's case will stay here. An Initial Scheduling Order
will issue.
So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr. r/
United States District Judge

-2-